Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Home alone
    My Bikes
    Trek 4300 X 2. Trek 1000, Trek 6000
    Posts
    6,021
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I am not cross posting here. I posted this same question in the Road Cycling forum. It was good info. However as a prospective road bike owner i still have questions. I think my style of riding will be closer to touring than racing.

    Using most of the online fit calculators, they recommend that i ride somewhere near 59 cm. The French fit on the Colorado Cyclist site, puts me on a 60-62.

    So, for those of you that ride more like a tourer than a racer:

    1. How tall are you?

    2. What frame size do you ride? (if you ride multiple sizes, please list all of them- road bikes only)

    3. What is your cycling inseam? (this is calculated by placing your bare feet about 8 " apart and standing against a wall. Place a book firmly up into your crotch and make sure the back of the book rests squarely against the wall. Then measure from the top of the book to the floor.)

    4. What is your pants inseam?

  2. #2
    Senior Member Dougmt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Middle of Montana
    My Bikes
    1996 Specialized Stumpjumper
    Posts
    467
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm gonna have to do this in the next couple of days... I'm 6'2" but have a 32" inseam... and a long torso. should be interesting to see what bike I should actually be riding
    D

  3. #3
    Older I get, Better I was velonomad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Schenectady NY & Wilmington NC
    My Bikes
    a bunch of them, most made by me, a couple made by others
    Posts
    1,630
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    IMO size has a lot to do with how you intend to use the bike. almost all sizing regimes I have seen are based on what a racer needs not a recreational or touring cyclist. Few of us ride like Connie Carpenter or Greg Lemond, On the flip side when was the last time you heard of either of them taking a 1500 mile tour carrying 40 lbs of kit? Racers generally want a flat back and to be stretched out for aerodynamics. They often have the bars several inches lower than the saddle. A tourist ( and most recreational cyclists)on the other hand generally wants higher bars, and the back more upright closer to a 45 degree angle. They often need the bars close to if not above saddle height.
    But few shops size you according to what you plan to ride or even what is comfortable. They all size you on a frame that is 2-3cm small, Then you have to buy a high rise stem or a stem extension to get the bars up to a comfortable height. The old rule of thumb( french sizing ?) when I worked in bikeshops and before the compact frame sizing craze was inseam minus 9" for a 700c level top tube frame. that would leave you about 5-6" of seatpost showing. Standover height would almost have your crotch resting on the top tube. Rivendell has a similar sizing scheme and gives a better explanation of it. could it be the reason Rivendell owners like thier bikes so much is that they fit ?!

    So using the old timey method: Floor to crotch I am a tad over 34 inches, if I subtract 9" I have 25" (~63 cm) A 63 allows me within the range of a normal road stem to raise or lower the bars above or below my saddle height . Yes 63cm is what I ride (almost 28 years) One caveat though is if you are sizing a cyclo cross bike for road use. The BB is usually a good 1/2- 3/4" or more higher than most road bikes so you need to go at least a centimeter or more smaller. Obviously if you going to cyclocross you would go down 2-3 more centimeters in size.

    Using the old formula Someone like Doug who is my height but two inches shorter in the leg would ride a 58 cm but look for a top tube as long as he can find (61cm or longer )
    Last edited by velonomad; 01-24-05 at 11:11 PM.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,251
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Height: 5"10"

    Leg Length: 35 inches

    slack's inseam: 32 inches

    Preferred size bike for loaded touring: size 60 to size 62

  5. #5
    aspiring wannabe hoogie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    timaru/oamaru, new zealand
    My Bikes
    trek 520, thorn nomad, giant yukon, avanti aggressor, bauer racing bike, couple of other projects ...
    Posts
    288
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    height: 6'4"
    leg length: butt to floor
    bike sizes: Trek 520 .. 25"; Giant Yukon .. 21.5"; Thorn Nomad .. 595mm;
    thought for today: "Does my ass look fast on this bike?"

  6. #6
    FOG
    FOG is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Annapolis, MD
    Posts
    798
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougmt
    I'm gonna have to do this in the next couple of days... I'm 6'2" but have a 32" inseam... and a long torso. should be interesting to see what bike I should actually be riding
    D
    I have the same leg and torso dimensions, and it is a real struggle to find a frame that feels good. My personal favorite, in terms of fit, is a 25" Schwinn le Tour II, from the mid '70s. I cannot straddle the top tube, but it is very comfortable once I get going. I have noticed that bikes today seem a lot smaller for a given measurement, so a 61 cm seems a lot smaller than the 25". The real giveaway is the head tube. The head tube on a typical 61 cm is more like my old 23" Varsity's. Obviously some of the difference arises from measuring center to top instead of center to center.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •